Sadly, Zimmerman was not guilty of the charges. The problem is the law in the state of Florida. All those assholes who pushed for the stand your ground law to be enacted are have blood on their hands along with Zimmerman. They made what he did legal.

This was a racist, wannabe cop vigilante with a short temper, a shiatty brain that makes horrible decisions and a chip on his shoulder.

Gun owners have a responsibility to be the cooler head, to go away from conflict and confrontation when they are carrying. They are the ones with the responsibility to ONLY use the weapon in self-defense, and to NOT go looking for situations where they may be forced to defend themselves with it.

Zimmerman went looking for trouble, but according to the farked up Florida law, he did nothing illegal.

AdolfOliverPanties:Sadly, Zimmerman was not guilty of the charges. The problem is the law in the state of Florida. All those assholes who pushed for the stand your ground law to be enacted are have blood on their hands along with Zimmerman. They made what he did legal.

This was a racist, wannabe cop vigilante with a short temper, a shiatty brain that makes horrible decisions and a chip on his shoulder.

Gun owners have a responsibility to be the cooler head, to go away from conflict and confrontation when they are carrying. They are the ones with the responsibility to ONLY use the weapon in self-defense, and to NOT go looking for situations where they may be forced to defend themselves with it.

Zimmerman went looking for trouble, but according to the farked up Florida law, he did nothing illegal.

He is responsible for Martin's death, but not guilty of a crime.

I think you still would have been hard to find a jury that would convict no matter what the law said.

AdolfOliverPanties:The problem is the law in the state of Florida. All those assholes who pushed for the stand your ground law to be enacted are have blood on their hands along with Zimmerman. They made what he did legal.

Even more sadly, is how many people think this case was tried on "Stand your ground".

AdolfOliverPanties:Sadly, Zimmerman was not guilty of the charges. The problem is the law in the state of Florida. All those assholes who pushed for the stand your ground law to be enacted are have blood on their hands along with Zimmerman. They made what he did legal.

This was a racist, wannabe cop vigilante with a short temper, a shiatty brain that makes horrible decisions and a chip on his shoulder.

Gun owners have a responsibility to be the cooler head, to go away from conflict and confrontation when they are carrying. They are the ones with the responsibility to ONLY use the weapon in self-defense, and to NOT go looking for situations where they may be forced to defend themselves with it.

Zimmerman went looking for trouble, but according to the farked up Florida law, he did nothing illegal.

He is responsible for Martin's death, but not guilty of a crime.

If Zimmerman's parent's wouldn't have farked some 29 or 30 years ago Zimmerman wouldn't be around to kill Martin. I say we charge them with a crime as well since they're partially responsible for this situation.

AdolfOliverPanties:Sadly, Zimmerman was not guilty of the charges. The problem is the law in the state of Florida. All those assholes who pushed for the stand your ground law to be enacted are have blood on their hands along with Zimmerman. They made what he did legal.

This was a racist, wannabe cop vigilante with a short temper, a shiatty brain that makes horrible decisions and a chip on his shoulder.

Gun owners have a responsibility to be the cooler head, to go away from conflict and confrontation when they are carrying. They are the ones with the responsibility to ONLY use the weapon in self-defense, and to NOT go looking for situations where they may be forced to defend themselves with it.

Zimmerman went looking for trouble, but according to the farked up Florida law, he did nothing illegal.

Yep, it's almost like a bunch of civilians thought Zimmerman was doing something wrong, so they took the law into their own hands, tracked him down and killed him. Doing something like that would be a terrible injustice.

It still amazes me that people think an overweight 29 year old could "stalk" a young guy who could likely have run much faster than Z could walk

They're both stupid: Z for getting out of the car and carrying a gun in violation of Neighborhood Watch regulations, T for not just running back to his house and calling the police. I find it hard to get terribly outraged about two stupid people doing what stupid people do. This kind of thing isn't uncommon

/Don't start pretending I'm a conservative or something, I've earned the ire of both "sides" to this trial

BojanglesPaladin:AdolfOliverPanties: The problem is the law in the state of Florida. All those assholes who pushed for the stand your ground law to be enacted are have blood on their hands along with Zimmerman. They made what he did legal.

Even more sadly, is how many people think this case was tried on "Stand your ground".

For shiat's sake THIS.

SYG had NOTHING to do with this case. I want to throttle the idiot who tries to blame it on Florida law every time I hear it. This was a straight up self-defense case. Period.

AdolfOliverPanties:Sadly, Zimmerman was not guilty of the charges. The problem is the law in the state of Florida. All those assholes who pushed for the stand your ground law to be enacted are have blood on their hands along with Zimmerman. They made what he did legal.

This was a racist, wannabe cop vigilante with a short temper, a shiatty brain that makes horrible decisions and a chip on his shoulder.

Gun owners have a responsibility to be the cooler head, to go away from conflict and confrontation when they are carrying. They are the ones with the responsibility to ONLY use the weapon in self-defense, and to NOT go looking for situations where they may be forced to defend themselves with it.

Zimmerman went looking for trouble, but according to the farked up Florida law, he did nothing illegal.

He is responsible for Martin's death, but not guilty of a crime.

In every state except maybe Ohio (there's one goofy one out there) what Zimm did was standard self defense. This had nothing to do w/ SYG, nor has any proof been shown that Zimm is a racist.

AdolfOliverPanties:This was a racist, wannabe cop vigilante with a short temper, a shiatty brain that makes horrible decisions and a chip on his shoulder.

The fault in this is obviously 50/50 as Trayvon Martin did go out walking after dark while black. If Trayvon Martin would have just left his black at home that night, he would still be alive today.

It's kind of ironic that the safest place for Zimmerman now would be a state that doesn't allow concealed carry for any and all idiots that want it and doesn't have a "He's comin' right for us" "Stand yer ground" law.

I was in my workplace lunch room with several middle-aged black ladies when the OJ verdict came in. There was much rejoicing to say the least. It didn't matter that he most likely did the crime - it was only that a black man got off - that was all that mattered and all that will matter here. A black was killed and a "white" guy did it. Automatic guilty.

aircraftkiller:It still amazes me that people think an overweight 29 year old could "stalk" a young guy who could likely have run much faster than Z could walk

They're both stupid: Z for getting out of the car and carrying a gun in violation of Neighborhood Watch regulations, T for not just running back to his house and calling the police. I find it hard to get terribly outraged about two stupid people doing what stupid people do. This kind of thing isn't uncommon

/Don't start pretending I'm a conservative or something, I've earned the ire of both "sides" to this trial

Befuddled:It's kind of ironic that the safest place for Zimmerman now would be a state that doesn't allow concealed carry for any and all idiots that want it and doesn't have a "He's comin' right for us" "Stand yer ground" law.

Again, there was NO STAND YOUR GROUND defense in play here.

Keep repeating that to yourself and anyone else you meet until the urge to show everyone your ignorance passes.

BojanglesPaladin:AdolfOliverPanties: The problem is the law in the state of Florida. All those assholes who pushed for the stand your ground law to be enacted are have blood on their hands along with Zimmerman. They made what he did legal.

Even more sadly, is how many people think this case was tried on "Stand your ground".

BojanglesPaladin:Befuddled: It's kind of ironic that the safest place for Zimmerman now would be a state that doesn't allow concealed carry for any and all idiots that want it and doesn't have a "He's comin' right for us" "Stand yer ground" law.

Again, there was NO STAND YOUR GROUND defense in play here.

Keep repeating that to yourself and anyone else you meet until the urge to show everyone your ignorance passes.

AdolfOliverPanties:Sadly, Zimmerman was not guilty of the charges. The problem is the law in the state of Florida. All those assholes who pushed for the stand your ground law to be enacted are have blood on their hands along with Zimmerman. They made what he did legal.

Wrong. Under the self-defense laws of every state, even those where you have a positive duty to retreat, Zimmerman would have in all likelihood acquitted, given the same facts.

Here is the law in my state (New York):

2. A person may not use deadly physical force upon another person under circumstances specified in subdivision one unless: (a) The actor reasonably believes that such other person is using or about to use deadly physical force. Even in such case, however, the actor may not use deadly physical force if he or she knows that with complete personal safety, to oneself and others he or she may avoid the necessity of so doing by retreating; except that the actor is under no duty to retreat if he or she is: (i) in his or her dwelling and not the initial aggressor;

Even if Florida law was identical to that (interestingly, I didn't know NYS had Castle Doctrine), he still would have been covered as he couldn't retreat in complete safety to him and others, because Martin had him pinned to the ground.

BojanglesPaladin:Befuddled: It's kind of ironic that the safest place for Zimmerman now would be a state that doesn't allow concealed carry for any and all idiots that want it and doesn't have a "He's comin' right for us" "Stand yer ground" law.

Again, there was NO STAND YOUR GROUND defense in play here.

Keep repeating that to yourself and anyone else you meet until the urge to show everyone your ignorance passes.

Marcus Aurelius:It's also not his fault the prosecutor overreached with the charges.

...please stop with this. The jury was allowed to consider lesser charges, but acquitted him anyway. In fact, Florida law pretty clearly states that he probably shouldn't have even been tried at all, meaning the prosecutor was "overreaching" by charging him with any crime. The prosecutor was in zugzwang from Day 1, and he knew it.

dittybopper:AdolfOliverPanties: Sadly, Zimmerman was not guilty of the charges. The problem is the law in the state of Florida. All those assholes who pushed for the stand your ground law to be enacted are have blood on their hands along with Zimmerman. They made what he did legal.

Wrong. Under the self-defense laws of every state, even those where you have a positive duty to retreat, Zimmerman would have in all likelihood acquitted, given the same facts.

Here is the law in my state (New York):

2. A person may not use deadly physical force upon another person under circumstances specified in subdivision one unless: (a) The actor reasonably believes that such other person is using or about to use deadly physical force. Even in such case, however, the actor may not use deadly physical force if he or she knows that with complete personal safety, to oneself and others he or she may avoid the necessity of so doing by retreating; except that the actor is under no duty to retreat if he or she is: (i) in his or her dwelling and not the initial aggressor;

Even if Florida law was identical to that (interestingly, I didn't know NYS had Castle Doctrine), he still would have been covered as he couldn't retreat in complete safety to him and others, because Martin had him pinned to the ground.

This case wasn't what you think it was about.

Did Treyvon Martin have the right to defended himself from an armed assailant?

There's not a shred of doubt in my mind...if the facts of the case were exactly the same, except teenage Trayvon was the guy wandering the neighborhood at night with a loaded pistol and GZ was the unarmed dead guy, there would have been an arrest right then and there, TM would have been tried and found guilty and not a single person here would have cared a bit. Including me.

dittybopper:AdolfOliverPanties: Sadly, Zimmerman was not guilty of the charges. The problem is the law in the state of Florida. All those assholes who pushed for the stand your ground law to be enacted are have blood on their hands along with Zimmerman. They made what he did legal.

Wrong. Under the self-defense laws of every state, even those where you have a positive duty to retreat, Zimmerman would have in all likelihood acquitted, given the same facts.

Here is the law in my state (New York):

2. A person may not use deadly physical force upon another person under circumstances specified in subdivision one unless: (a) The actor reasonably believes that such other person is using or about to use deadly physical force. Even in such case, however, the actor may not use deadly physical force if he or she knows that with complete personal safety, to oneself and others he or she may avoid the necessity of so doing by retreating; except that the actor is under no duty to retreat if he or she is: (i) in his or her dwelling and not the initial aggressor;

Even if Florida law was identical to that (interestingly, I didn't know NYS had Castle Doctrine), he still would have been covered as he couldn't retreat in complete safety to him and others, because Martin had him pinned to the ground.

This case wasn't what you think it was about.

There's one state in the Midwest that doesn't match the rest of the US (think its Ohio) and the burden of proof is on the defense instead of the prosecution

The fact that it was Zimmerman who was on the phone with the police not Martin went a long way to corroborate his story. I still think it's his fault but other than being overwhelmingly stupid I don't see that he did anything criminal.

And for god's sake people just because the victim is a different race than the shooter doesn't mean it was racist. All the evidence indicates that Zimmerman followed because Trayvon was wandering around a neighborhood, on foot, at night, in a hoodie not because he was black. I hate to say it but until we can murder each other without immediately jumping to racism we will never live MLK's dream.

Philip Francis Queeg:dittybopper: AdolfOliverPanties: Sadly, Zimmerman was not guilty of the charges. The problem is the law in the state of Florida. All those assholes who pushed for the stand your ground law to be enacted are have blood on their hands along with Zimmerman. They made what he did legal.

Wrong. Under the self-defense laws of every state, even those where you have a positive duty to retreat, Zimmerman would have in all likelihood acquitted, given the same facts.

Here is the law in my state (New York):

2. A person may not use deadly physical force upon another person under circumstances specified in subdivision one unless: (a) The actor reasonably believes that such other person is using or about to use deadly physical force. Even in such case, however, the actor may not use deadly physical force if he or she knows that with complete personal safety, to oneself and others he or she may avoid the necessity of so doing by retreating; except that the actor is under no duty to retreat if he or she is: (i) in his or her dwelling and not the initial aggressor;

Even if Florida law was identical to that (interestingly, I didn't know NYS had Castle Doctrine), he still would have been covered as he couldn't retreat in complete safety to him and others, because Martin had him pinned to the ground.

This case wasn't what you think it was about.

Did Treyvon Martin have the right to defended himself from an armed assailant?

You think ditty's ever going to say that the guy with the gun was in the wrong?

AdolfOliverPanties:Sadly, Zimmerman was not guilty of the charges. The problem is the law in the state of Florida. All those assholes who pushed for the stand your ground law to be enacted are have blood on their hands along with Zimmerman. They made what he did legal.

This was a racist, wannabe cop vigilante with a short temper, a shiatty brain that makes horrible decisions and a chip on his shoulder.

Gun owners have a responsibility to be the cooler head, to go away from conflict and confrontation when they are carrying. They are the ones with the responsibility to ONLY use the weapon in self-defense, and to NOT go looking for situations where they may be forced to defend themselves with it.

Zimmerman went looking for trouble, but according to the farked up Florida law, he did nothing illegal.

He is responsible for Martin's death, but not guilty of a crime.

Amazing you're the 11ty billionth person to get it wrong. If he had invoked stand your ground he'd have had a hearing to avoid trial. He would have lost that hearing. He was found not guilty because he used a self defense...defense. In a civil trial he could face financial penalties regardless if he is found to have been negligent or what have you. But stand-your-ground does not apply. But we can all pretend it does right? maybe it makes you feel more self righteous?

(3)A person who is not engaged in an unlawful activity and who is attacked in any other place where he or she has a right to be has no duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground and meet force with force, including deadly force if he or she reasonably believes it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.

I am still kind of puzzled why everybody in the US sees the race factor as so important in this case. Martin isn't dead because he is black, he is dead because civilians/morons are allowed to carry guns. In any other civilized country Zimmerman would have stayed in his car because he wouldn't have had a gun.

aircraftkiller:It still amazes me that people think an overweight 29 year old could "stalk" a young guy who could likely have run much faster than Z could walk

They're both stupid: Z for getting out of the car and carrying a gun in violation of Neighborhood Watch regulations, T for not just running back to his house and calling the police. I find it hard to get terribly outraged about two stupid people doing what stupid people do. This kind of thing isn't uncommon

/Don't start pretending I'm a conservative or something, I've earned the ire of both "sides" to this trial

On the left is Zimmerman shortly after the shooting, when he was regularly going to the gym and taking mixed martial arts. He gained a significant amount of weight before the trial even started, and continued to pack on fat during the trial. His lawyer claimed that he was gorging out of depression, but a few people theorized he did it to deliberately to project that exact image to the jury. Too fat to catch the kid, much less win a fight with him.

Mr_Fabulous:There's not a shred of doubt in my mind...if the facts of the case were exactly the same, except teenage Trayvon was the guy wandering the neighborhood at night with a loaded pistol and GZ was the unarmed dead guy, there would have been an arrest right then and there, TM would have been tried and found guilty and not a single person here would have cared a bit. Including me.

The defenses' argument was that Martin was pinned on the ground with Trayvon on top of him, which absolutely nullifies any need for "Stand your ground". You do not need to argue you had no requirement to flee when your argument is that there was no ability to flee.

Perhaps you can explain how you see these two legal strategies "are inextricably linked" in anyone but the general public's minds.

dittybopper:AdolfOliverPanties: Sadly, Zimmerman was not guilty of the charges. The problem is the law in the state of Florida. All those assholes who pushed for the stand your ground law to be enacted are have blood on their hands along with Zimmerman. They made what he did legal.

Wrong. Under the self-defense laws of every state, even those where you have a positive duty to retreat, Zimmerman would have in all likelihood acquitted, given the same facts.

Here is the law in my state (New York):

2. A person may not use deadly physical force upon another person under circumstances specified in subdivision one unless: (a) The actor reasonably believes that such other person is using or about to use deadly physical force. Even in such case, however, the actor may not use deadly physical force if he or she knows that with complete personal safety, to oneself and others he or she may avoid the necessity of so doing by retreating; except that the actor is under no duty to retreat if he or she is: (i) in his or her dwelling and not the initial aggressor;

Even if Florida law was identical to that (interestingly, I didn't know NYS had Castle Doctrine), he still would have been covered as he couldn't retreat in complete safety to him and others, because Martin had him pinned to the ground.

This case wasn't what you think it was about.

How'd he have him pinned to the ground while he was in his car?

The ability to retreat without harm was available throughout the entire pre-fight confrontation, therefore, he had a duty to retreat before the fight started. Thus, he can't use deadly force. It's that simple. No New York jury you could get would not convict Zimmerman for murder.